Weird Science protects its honor by dying in a horrible accident

Weird Science does dumb things to show off, nags its parents, finds a living …

A state of living stupidly: We here in the US tend to use the phrase "honor culture" to describe recent arrivals from a number of foreign countries. But if the authors of a recent paper have it right, then it's the rural white population in the US that has the most to worry about from upholding their honor. That's where the researchers found elevated levels of accidental deaths in states that have traditionally held to a concept of honor, specifically those in the West and South. In their study, people who endorsed an honor-focused belief system were also more likely to engage in high-risk activities. Before you start focusing on the sort of guys who brought you Jackass, it's worth pointing out that the authors found the same trends applied to rural white females (although they were less pronounced).

Fighting the nag factor: Children five and under don't do most of the shopping, so how is it that many pantries end up filled with their favorite sugary, low nutrition products? Researchers think it's because children use a weapon that most of their mothers will later end up turning on them: nagging. According to the researchers' classification system, kids had several forms of nagging in their arsenal: juvenile, boundary testing, and manipulative. As they get older, the overall rate of nagging goes up, and the kids tend to get more manipulative.

"Our study indicates that while overall media use was not associated with nagging, one's familiarity with commercial television characters was significantly associated with overall and specific types of nagging," one of the authors stated. "In addition, mothers cited packaging, characters, and commercials as the three main forces compelling their children to nag." So, it sounds like you can limit your kids' screen time and still end up with them being familiar with the latest character craze and whatever product it is that they're endorsing.

Straight out of the Cretaceous, living in a tourist spot: Palau is an island nation in Pacific, north of New Guinea, noted in part for the diving there. Apparently, the divers were missing out on seeing the eel equivalent of the coelacanth, a lobe finned fish from a group that was thought to have died out millions of years ago. Thirty-five meters down, the authors have found a cave inhabited by an "enigmatic, small eel-like fish." Some of its features are found in what we now classify as "true eels." "Others are found among [true eels] only in the Cretaceous fossils, and still others are primitive with respect to both Recent and fossil eels," the authors write. The authors estimate that this species is on its own lineage that has been evolving independently for about 200 million years. So far, it appears to be the only remnant of this group, although it's possible that now that we know what to look for, we'll find more. Maybe even in other popular tourist destinations.

Are you ready to put a gator in your tank?: If your car burns biodiesel, you apparently are. A group of researchers from the University of Louisiana at Lafayette have noticed that the local alligator meat processing industry currently dumps lots of waste fat into local landfills. The authors obtained some of this fat and subjected it to "microwave rendering" and then processed it into biofuels that met most industry standards, including for combustion flash point. There's an estimated 15 million pounds of alligator fat discarded each year, which would make a nice addition to the raw materials available for biofuels.

Your partner's childhood stress can kill you (if you're a finch): There's evidence available from a number of species, including humans, that chronic stress in childhood can result in biological changes that persist into adulthood, leaving the stressees at risk of a variety of ill effects. The authors decided to test whether this was the case with birds, using the zebra finch as their experimental system. They simulated stress with a few injections of glucocorticoids early after hatching, and then tracked the finches' life span. As expected, the animals that had been injected had a shortened life expectancy. To their surprise, however, the mates of the stressed out birds also died young. "Only 5 per cent of control birds with control partners had died after 3 years, compared with over 40 per cent in early stress-early stress pairs," they write. In a nod to traditional marriage vows, the title of the resulting paper starts with the phrase "For better or worse."

Scrabble on the brain: Practice doesn't necessarily make perfect, but when it comes to a lot of mental tasks, it definitely makes better. And that's true even if you're practicing a game. People who play scrabble competitively are much better than their peers at recognizing words, especially when they're oriented vertically. But this didn't make them any better at understanding what the words meant, just that they weren't a nonsense string of letters. (The authors call this effect "semantic deemphasis.") Since most people don't start playing Scrabble until long after the basic word recognition system is in place, the authors suggest that it's possible to increase this system's efficiency even late in life.

Can we get less of these types of articles? All they seem to do is confirm things that anyone with common sense would've known even thousands of years ago. Stress is hard on the body, and children whine and nag until they either get their way or see that it won't work. What exactly is ground breaking about these studies?

The more studies we conduct to confirm things we've known for thousands of years, the less man hours we have researching things we don't understand.

A state of living stupidly: We here in the US tend to use the phrase "honor culture" to describe recent arrivals from a number of foreign countries.

What does that mean? I've never heard the phrase "honour culture" before, so I don't really understand what that segment was getting at. What does an "honour-focussed belief system" for rural whites mean? Why would an honour culture make me think of "jackass"? I don't get that segment at all.

A state of living stupidly: We here in the US tend to use the phrase "honor culture" to describe recent arrivals from a number of foreign countries.

What does that mean? I've never heard the phrase "honour culture" before, so I don't really understand what that segment was getting at. What does an "honour-focussed belief system" for rural whites mean? Why would an honour culture make me think of "jackass"? I don't get that segment at all.

Yeah, me neither. A bit of explanation might help. What's obvious in one part of USA might not be all that obvious in another part, or another country. I have an idea what "an honor system" is, but how the heck does it apply to the above?

Yeah, me neither. A bit of explanation might help. What's obvious in one part of USA might not be all that obvious in another part, or another country. I have an idea what "an honor system" is, but how the heck does it apply to the above?

Yeah, totally. I'm not american, and when I think of an honour system I think of things like we have at work, where a heap of food/drinks are available with a coin jar, and the price list is taped to the wall behind them. If you take something, you pay for it, you don't steal anything.

Yeah, me neither. A bit of explanation might help. What's obvious in one part of USA might not be all that obvious in another part, or another country. I have an idea what "an honor system" is, but how the heck does it apply to the above?

Yeah, totally. I'm not american, and when I think of an honour system I think of things like we have at work, where a heap of food/drinks are available with a coin jar, and the price list is taped to the wall behind them. If you take something, you pay for it, you don't steal anything.

The Scots-Irish immigrants to Appalachia had a strong honor culture, and the result was intense family feuds (the Hatfields vs the McCoys was the most famous one). The idea that you might fight if you are insulted, or a family member is insulted, is an honor-culture idea.

Can we get less of these types of articles? All they seem to do is confirm things that anyone with common sense would've known even thousands of years ago. Stress is hard on the body, and children whine and nag until they either get their way or see that it won't work. What exactly is ground breaking about these studies?

The more studies we conduct to confirm things we've known for thousands of years, the less man hours we have researching things we don't understand.

I like these articles though - there's a lot of humor to be found, especially in the writing style. Plus, a lot of times something actually surprising and interesting is featured here.

Thanks for that, though now I'm left even more confused about what the article was saying.

Why would people from the US describe "recent arrivals" as having an honour culture if it's more of a southern US thing? And what does an honour culture have to do with accidental deaths if it's about duelling, chivalry, and defending your property? That doesn't sound very accidental!

Can we get less of these types of articles? All they seem to do is confirm things that anyone with common sense would've known even thousands of years ago. Stress is hard on the body, and children whine and nag until they either get their way or see that it won't work. What exactly is ground breaking about these studies?

The more studies we conduct to confirm things we've known for thousands of years, the less man hours we have researching things we don't understand.

Until you can prove it using science and explain the why and how behind it, "common sense" is no better then playing with animal entrails to predict the future.

Can we get less of these types of articles? All they seem to do is confirm things that anyone with common sense would've known even thousands of years ago. Stress is hard on the body, and children whine and nag until they either get their way or see that it won't work. What exactly is ground breaking about these studies?

The more studies we conduct to confirm things we've known for thousands of years, the less man hours we have researching things we don't understand.

Except that we often see studies disproving things that everybody "knew" thanks to "common sense", so, no, those studies aren't useless in any way. When something that most people think to be obvious may actually be wrong, proving whether it's true or not does have a purpose.

Plus, your examples aren't that well chosen:- the stress thing isn't just about stress being "hard on the body", it's also about the influence of a subject which was stressed in the past on its current mate - something which isn't obvious at all, considering how indirect the exposure to stress is. Not to mention the quantitative aspect: do you really think it's obvious whether a given stress level is "a little hard on the body" or "very hard on the body"?- the point about children nagging isn't that they nag, it's about identifying the different tactics they use to do so, and about understanding which factors make children resort to nagging more or less often. That last point is particularly important, because it deals with screen time and TV commercials targeted at little kids, which are the subjects of rather heated debates nowadays.

Can we get less of these types of articles? All they seem to do is confirm things that anyone with common sense would've known even thousands of years ago. Stress is hard on the body, and children whine and nag until they either get their way or see that it won't work. What exactly is ground breaking about these studies?

The more studies we conduct to confirm things we've known for thousands of years, the less man hours we have researching things we don't understand.

Except that we often see studies disproving things that everybody "knew" thanks to "common sense", so, no, those studies aren't useless in any way. When something that most people think to be obvious may actually be wrong, proving whether it's true or not does have a purpose.

City gangs are also an "honor culture" and their members have considerably shorter life spans.

Yeah, I actually read the abstract from that article (never heard of this publication before by the way, despite having worked with science publications before, which already makes me very skeptical) and it just sounds off. They specifically say that they didn't notice a correlation in higher rates of accidental deaths and "cultures of honor" in any other race but Caucasian.

Yeah, the individuals involved in the city gangs are more likely to die from a homicide than an accident and the infamous variation of honor from places like Japan would probably have more suicides but there are way too many things that could contribute to the behaviors they're looking in to.

That aside, the way Ars put their summary was completely uncalled for - especially the indication that all whites in the sticks have racist tendencies. It's just a mean way to put that study's findings - even if there was a guarantee it was true. Besides, There's a burnt up tree in my area that stands as testament to a certain Jackass star's ability to die (and kill his passenger) from a stupid accident. Of all the shows to pick...

So I guess I'm the only one wondering what the heck is being done to produce "15 million pounds of alligator fat." I mean, I know it's used in some clothing and that it is eaten in some areas, but I had no idea alligator was being processed on anywhere near that scale.

Why would people from the US describe "recent arrivals" as having an honour culture if it's more of a southern US thing? And what does an honour culture have to do with accidental deaths if it's about duelling, chivalry, and defending your property? :confused: That doesn't sound very accidental!

At least part of what John was referring to (in an overly oblique and politically correct manner), was the Machismo aspect of Hispanic culture. Obviously they're not all like that, but round here there are plenty of vatos that think it is fine to kick your ass because they didn't like the way you looked at them (or their girl). In the past, Irish immigrants were also seen as unruly hooligans.

As far as accidental death, it probably has more to do with feeling the need to do act tough in front of your friends, so you manhood isn't called into question.

Why would people from the US describe "recent arrivals" as having an honour culture if it's more of a southern US thing? And what does an honour culture have to do with accidental deaths if it's about duelling, chivalry, and defending your property? That doesn't sound very accidental!

At least part of what John was referring to (in an overly oblique and politically correct manner), was the Machismo aspect of Hispanic culture. Obviously they're not all like that, but round here there are plenty of vatos that think it is fine to kick your ass because they didn't like the way you looked at them (or their girl). In the past, Irish immigrants were also seen as unruly hooligans.

As far as accidental death, it probably has more to do with feeling the need to do act tough in front of your friends, so you manhood isn't called into question.

Oh, ok. I guess the phrasing threw me. Picking fights because someone looked at you, being a hooligan, or acting tough in front of friends didn't spring to mind when I read "honour", but I get your point.

Different part of the world really have different ways of looking at the same concept, huh? This is definitely the most baffling Weird Science I've ever read. It made about as much sense as "Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas"!

...- the point about children nagging isn't that they nag, it's about identifying the different tactics they use to do so, and about understanding which factors make children resort to nagging more or less often. That last point is particularly important, because it deals with screen time and TV commercials targeted at little kids, which are the subjects of rather heated debates nowadays.

Back in 2001 when i worked at a web agency that had a big contract with the marketing dept. of a major brand of breakfast cereals, our client's marketing director said flat-out that they had to shift their advertising strategy to get kids to nag more than in the '70's, because more working moms meant that the kids didn't tag along on grocery shopping nearly as much, and mom needed to feel the nagging in response to seeing the sugary stuff on the shelves. Creepy.

Oh, ok. I guess the phrasing threw me. Picking fights because someone looked at you, being a hooligan, or acting tough in front of friends didn't spring to mind when I read "honour", but I get your point.

Different part of the world really have different ways of looking at the same concept, huh? This is definitely the most baffling Weird Science I've ever read. It made about as much sense as "Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas"!

It's more useful to think of "honor" as "reputation + ego" in these situations.

Do you really think so? I mean, what else *is* honor, other than reputation + ego?

I would have thought having an ego was counter to the ideals of honour (being selfless, modest, having an empathetic attitude, etc). That's definitely not what I associate with ego, quite the opposite.

And reputation in this context, is the difference between me trying to enforce the reputation I want (as per the "honour culture" described in the links), compared to accepting the reputation I've created and deserve (which I think is a lot more honourable).